ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2025
Institution of a formal multidisciplinary heart team for high-risk coronary revascularization.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term survival after multidisciplinary heart team-guided management of complex coronary artery disease.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025Article
- Insights from a multidisciplinary heart team for highest-risk valve disease.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The heart team approach is now the standard of care for patients with complex coronary artery disease; however, the definition of a heart team is variable. We embarked on a project to create an extended, multidisciplinary heart team to evaluate patients we deemed high risk for coronary revascularization. In doing so, we created a new service, workflow, and paradigm. Methods: Herein, we describe the process through which we created our high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention team, our criteria for determining risk, our process for evaluating these patients, and quality assurance. Additionally, we describe the design of our prospective study assessing 200 patients with complex coronary artery disease. The primary outcomes include the final heart team revascularization decision, all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac events, acute kidney injury, postintervention bleeding, and length of stay. Conclusion: Establishing a multidisciplinary heart team may help with complex and high-risk patient and family scenarios and potentially improve patient outcomes. A study has been initiated to test this hypothesis formally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.